Is it right to alter the way people are born?

Many science fiction stories deal with the possibility of being able to “design” our children by choosing the specific physical and personality traits we would like them to have.No longer is this just fiction, however. Cloning may allow us to weed out genetic disease, enhance desirable traits, even deliver made to... show more Many science fiction stories deal with the possibility of being able to “design” our children by choosing the specific physical and personality traits we would like them to have.No longer is this just fiction, however. Cloning may allow us to weed out genetic disease, enhance desirable traits, even deliver made to order children.Do you think this is a good idea? Why or why not?

Follow

11 answers 11

Report Abuse

Are you sure that you want to delete this answer?

Sorry, something has gone wrong.

Trending Now

Answers

Best Answer: Cloning and genetic engineering are two different things. In "Brave New World" the genetic engineering doesn't save the society. A superficial examination of genetic engineering would suggest that there are some positive benefits; however, the negatives outweigh the positives.
Excluding the morality and ethics all we have to do is look at the genetic engineering done in agriculture and apply that to the human being. For many of our food crops there is no biodiversity which means that; for example, one single potato disease can wipe out most of the potatoes grown on the planet. A lack of biodiversity in both plants and animals make individual species more vulnerable to extinction.
If we look at human beings, one suspected cause of the increase in the numbers and types of allergies is due to the over sanitisation of our homes and bodies because the immune system is out of whack. Looking at reproduction no one knows out of the thousands of sperm ejaculated at one time, which one will be the one to fertilise the egg. (Look up the life span of a sperm) so one problem will be to do a genetic analysis of both the sperm and the egg before fertilisation.
Looking at diseases bacteria and viruses are able to mutate very quickly so genetic engineering won't prevent diseases. It may cause the development of new ones for which there is no immunity and could cause the death of millions. Look up the stats for the flu epidemic in the early 20th century.

Hitler tried to do it by breeding a super race of blond blue eyed Aryans. There are now people who shop around at sperm banks and there are all sorts of experiments with designer genes that are used to create pest resistant corn and Frankenfish as well as experiments in cloning and attempts at smart pills so whether it is right or wrong nothing will stop it from happening.

A surgeon very kindly altered the way I was born, with 'two little cuts from a diamond knife'- and I now have very good sight without glasses or contact lenses. I was extremely grateful, and saw no reason not to take advantage of this operation. So, yes, it's right.

Actually, cloning has NOT allowed us to weed out anything as the clone is a copy of the original, warts and all.
(Start by researching your topic)

There are a lot of things both positive and negative about selection.
I will not write your paper for you (didn't think we would did you?) but the arguments can now be made both ways based on the recent history of the last 60 years.

For example, you can start your paper with corn. It started as a small grass and was cultivated and bread to be the primary foodstuff of the New Wolrd. This would be a positive "design." On the other hand, you can point out that breading of dogs has lead to problems. The German Shepard has poor hips. the bulldog has trouble breathing, all the result of breading for one trait without realizing what else could happen.

Then you have the sociological examples in the world today. China's "One Child" policy lead to the killing of many female children leading to a social imbalance. As China became more industrialized and women became more independent, this increased the problem of not enough women to go around. The enhancing of "desirable traits" often comes with unknown consequences. "Life," to use the quote, "finds a way."

I certainly think it would be a good thing if we were able to eliminate harmful genes through genetic engineering, although there would have to be very strict ethical controls against modification of genes that are just seen as undesirable, such as those for male pattern baldness or (the obvious problem) particular skin colours.

Enhancements would be a lot more problematic - altering the human genetic makeup to, for instance, strengthen bones or enhance night vision risks all sorts of undesirable side effects so this would have to be tested over the very long term before allowing anything like this into the population at large. Would such experimentation on humans ever be ethically acceptable?

One thing we can be sure of, however: once the tech becomes available someone, somewhere, is going to try both of these things.

That isn't cloning. It's taking things out of the DNA or changing genetics of a fetus. Cloning would be an exact physical copy of a living person. Two different things. They are probably not going to allow designer babies as it would create 2 classes of people. The perfect ones and the average human that would become an underclass. They will only allow diseases to be removed if something runs in the family.

i think it depends on how deeply you influence how people are born. the ability to prevent physical mutations, mental disabilities, and other negative traits would be wonderful though, more able bodied and healthy people is always best, no one should have to be disabled